MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982764661 · doi:10.1121/1.3559685

Energy velocity and quality factor of poroelastic waves in isotropic media

2011· article· en· W1982764661 on OpenAlexaff
Vladimir Gerasik, Marek Stastna

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoromechanicsPhysicsViscoelasticityIsotropyMechanicsDissipationBiot numberPhase velocityLongitudinal waveGroup velocityClassical mechanicsWave propagationMaterials scienceThermodynamicsPorosityOpticsPorous medium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The energy velocity and Q factor of poroelastic acoustic waves in the context of classical isotropic Biot's theory are revisited. Special attention is paid to the high frequency regime when interphase interaction is viscoelastic. The analogy with viscoelastic behavior is emphasized in derivation of the energy balance equations which relate kinetic energy, potential energy, viscous power dissipation, and elastic energy stored associated with each wave. These lead to exact closed form expressions for the energy velocity and Q factor for both longitudinal and shear waves from energy principles. Most notably, the analysis of the resulting expressions reveals that the energy velocity of both longitudinal and shear waves equals (exceeds) the corresponding phase velocity in the case of the low (full) frequency range theory, and that the exact expression for the Q factor contains an additive correction due to viscoelastic interphase interaction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207